US agency bows to pressure on organic standards
After receiving more than 200,000 comments from farmers, environmentalists, consumers and others, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced that it is backing down on proposed national organic standards.
The standards would have allowed farmers to use a wide range of toxic, synthetic substances, and left open the possibility of allowing use of genetically engineered organisms, sewage sludge and irradiation in organic production.
Almost all comments submitted to USDA criticised the standards for being far too weak and for compromising the integrity of the organic label.
The agency announced that it will evaluate the comments submitted in response to its proposal and submit a revised proposal for public comment later this year. The revised proposal will prohibit use of genetically engineered products, irradiation or sewage sludge, according to agriculture secretary Dan Glickman.
Organic industry and advocacy groups, including the Organic Trade Association and the Organic Farming Research Foundation, were pleased about the announcement, but said that there is still work to be done.
"We will continue lobbying the USDA, Congress and the White House for a federal label for organic that maintains the rigorous standards already established by the organic industry", said Katherine DiMatteo, head of the Organic Trade Association.
Since issuing its proposed standards in December, USDA has been flooded with critical comments from a broad range of consumers, activists and industry groups, including mainstream agricultural organisations.
The California Senate and Assembly issued a joint resolution stating that the rules, "would threaten the integrity of the organic process in our state". In addition, 32 US Senators and 48 House members wrote a letter to Glickman urging him to rewrite the organic rules or face action that would block them in Congress.
International groups also submitted comments, including the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements, which stated that the proposed standards were so bad they could hurt "our movement everywhere."
[From Pesticide Action Network North America Updates Service.]